[CWuestefeld]

Your analogy is flawed because a person's home is not analogous to their Facebook account. Their car might be

These are your opinions, your values. You've got no business with (a) deciding the value of a person's virtual identity and data; nor (b) weighing that against your value for the education about greater security.

You might be right -- FOR YOUR PERSONAL VALUES. But it's simply none of your business how another person would judge this in the balance. Your beneficiaries/victims have every right to decide for themselves that the security afforded by the current systems are sufficient for the risks. And the fact that their decision makes it easier for you to teach them a lesson does not give you the right to do so.

[compactdisk2]

ehh... I would strongly disagree. I think it would be a fairly universal opinion that having your Facebook account violated is favorable over having your home broken into, even if nothing is stolen or damaged.

I would agree that there are some ethical problems with his actions, but this is far from being ethically analogous to the whole break-in scenario.